Stuart v. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BALEY, Judge.
The key question involved in this appeal is whether the insurance company had knowledge of the non-occupancy of the insured premises prior to the issuance of the insurance contract. If so, it would be estopped to assert this defense, and plaintiffs would be entitled to recover.
It is the general rule that if an insurance company has knowledge through its agent prior to the issuance of a policy of fire insurance that the premises are vacant or unoccupied, the issuance of the policy waives any provision as to vacancy or non-occupancy, at least so far as it concerns the existing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wood v. . American Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Johnson v. Rhode Island InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Laughinghouse v. Great National InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Williams v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Horton v. Iowa Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Roberts v. Maine Bonding & Casualty Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. EdwardsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Durham v. CoxCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- STANDARD SUPPLY CO., INC. v. Reliance Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Wells v. North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.